DTW Roadshow
06-05-2012, 03:08 PM
#142
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 101
Of course I have read the TA. i don't appreciate the comment. More large RJs does not equal more mainline. It means more mainline competition. Higher alv/tlv means less pilots. I never said I wanted to work more for same pay. The 7th short call will still be there in certain months and that is a concession. You are still full in our current contract but you can now be assigned without your consent to alv plus 15 if not full. This previously required a yellow slip to give consent. These are all consessions. You might be gaining some things but you have to concede to give them. The survey never said what are you willing to give up to get certain things. Why? Because most Delta pilots said they already gave up enough in bankruptcy.
The 717 deal is a part of the Company’s re-fleeting plan, which includes increasing mainline flying along with a substantial reduction of 50-seat aircraft and an overall cap of DCI aircraft at 450 down from the current 598. The TA provisions allow faster access to 76-seat aircraft than they would have otherwise. The provisions permit the Company
to negotiate with the DCI carriers and aircraft suppliers to replace 50-seat aircraft with 76-seat on approximately a 2-for-1 basis. Absent that ability, the Company will be obligated
to expend significant amounts to perform maintenance required to continue to fly the 50-seat aircraft. Without the reduction in small jet capacity, they have no need to add mainline capacity. All the provisions in Section 1 are front- loaded toward mainline pilot protections. Small narrow-body aircraft (717s) must be in the fleet before 76-seat aircraft are added, and the appropriate number of 50- seat aircraft must then be removed from the DCI fleet in the same year in which 76-seat aircraft are added. Regardless of what the Company does with the mainline fleet, the minimum block-hour ratio will require that, if domestic mainline block hours are reduced below a mini- mum level, DCI block hours will also have to be reduced to remain in compliance with the PWA.
The rest just sounds like you're pouting (I never asked for that...). Well, I'm sorry to inform you again the whole object ofNEGOTIATIONS mean you have to sometimes sacrifice things in order to get other things of greater importance. I do believe the understanding was that everyone who participated in the survey knew what Contract NEGOTIATIONS meant.
06-05-2012, 03:20 PM
#143
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 52
What do you make of:
The 717 deal is a part of the Company’s re-fleeting plan, which includes increasing mainline flying along with a substantial reduction of 50-seat aircraft and an overall cap of DCI aircraft at 450 down from the current 598. The TA provisions allow faster access to 76-seat aircraft than they would have otherwise. The provisions permit the Company
to negotiate with the DCI carriers and aircraft suppliers to replace 50-seat aircraft with 76-seat on approximately a 2-for-1 basis. Absent that ability, the Company will be obligated
to expend significant amounts to perform maintenance required to continue to fly the 50-seat aircraft. Without the reduction in small jet capacity, they have no need to add mainline capacity. All the provisions in Section 1 are front- loaded toward mainline pilot protections. Small narrow-body aircraft (717s) must be in the fleet before 76-seat aircraft are added, and the appropriate number of 50- seat aircraft must then be removed from the DCI fleet in the same year in which 76-seat aircraft are added. Regardless of what the Company does with the mainline fleet, the minimum block-hour ratio will require that, if domestic mainline block hours are reduced below a mini- mum level, DCI block hours will also have to be reduced to remain in compliance with the PWA.
The rest just sounds like you're pouting (I never asked for that...). Well, I'm sorry to inform you again the whole object ofNEGOTIATIONS mean you have to sometimes sacrifice things in order to get other things of greater importance. I do believe the understanding was that everyone who participated in the survey knew what Contract NEGOTIATIONS meant.
The 717 deal is a part of the Company’s re-fleeting plan, which includes increasing mainline flying along with a substantial reduction of 50-seat aircraft and an overall cap of DCI aircraft at 450 down from the current 598. The TA provisions allow faster access to 76-seat aircraft than they would have otherwise. The provisions permit the Company
to negotiate with the DCI carriers and aircraft suppliers to replace 50-seat aircraft with 76-seat on approximately a 2-for-1 basis. Absent that ability, the Company will be obligated
to expend significant amounts to perform maintenance required to continue to fly the 50-seat aircraft. Without the reduction in small jet capacity, they have no need to add mainline capacity. All the provisions in Section 1 are front- loaded toward mainline pilot protections. Small narrow-body aircraft (717s) must be in the fleet before 76-seat aircraft are added, and the appropriate number of 50- seat aircraft must then be removed from the DCI fleet in the same year in which 76-seat aircraft are added. Regardless of what the Company does with the mainline fleet, the minimum block-hour ratio will require that, if domestic mainline block hours are reduced below a mini- mum level, DCI block hours will also have to be reduced to remain in compliance with the PWA.
The rest just sounds like you're pouting (I never asked for that...). Well, I'm sorry to inform you again the whole object ofNEGOTIATIONS mean you have to sometimes sacrifice things in order to get other things of greater importance. I do believe the understanding was that everyone who participated in the survey knew what Contract NEGOTIATIONS meant.
The company will get rid of the 50 seaters..they are a money pit.
This is not our problem.
They can have as many as they want..They do not compete with mainline flying.
A 76 seat 2 class RJ capable of 4 hour legs TAKES mainline flying.
Negotiations..
We got almost No pay raise when you look at the reduction in profit sharing and increase on flying hours.
It makes me scratch my head and wonder when we are headed for a year of historical profit for Delta and we give up 1/3 of our profit sharing.
A first grader counl do that math problem.
Johnnie do you want 10 candy bars or do you want 15??
IF we are negotiating please tell us WHAT DAL gave up???
06-05-2012, 03:37 PM
#144
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 101
The company will get rid of the 50 seaters..they are a money pit.
This is not our problem.
They can have as many as they want..They do not compete with mainline flying.
A 76 seat 2 class RJ capable of 4 hour legs TAKES mainline flying.
Negotiations..
We got almost No pay raise when you look at the reduction in profit sharing and increase on flying hours.
It makes me scratch my head and wonder when we are headed for a year of historical profit for Delta and we give up 1/3 of our profit sharing.
A first grader counl do that math problem.
Johnnie do you want 10 candy bars or do you want 15??
IF we are negotiating please tell us WHAT DAL gave up???
This is not our problem.
They can have as many as they want..They do not compete with mainline flying.
A 76 seat 2 class RJ capable of 4 hour legs TAKES mainline flying.
Negotiations..
We got almost No pay raise when you look at the reduction in profit sharing and increase on flying hours.
It makes me scratch my head and wonder when we are headed for a year of historical profit for Delta and we give up 1/3 of our profit sharing.
A first grader counl do that math problem.
Johnnie do you want 10 candy bars or do you want 15??
IF we are negotiating please tell us WHAT DAL gave up???
Having 255 as a max right now is just simply not possible. More 50 seaters is very possible under the current. We give them more 70+ seaters, we get more mainline flying, the customers are happier, they keep coming back and bringing more to pay our paychecks, we continue to upgauge because a 70+ seater can no longer carry the loads, we continue to negotiate fewer RJ's over subsequent contracts, we raise ticket prices, etc... See where this is going?
Why are the regionals so big and powerful? Because we had no cap on the amount of flying they could perform for us if this TA gets voted down.
06-05-2012, 03:47 PM
#145
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 52
Why is it so difficult to understand that DCI isn't going anywhere anytime soon regardless of what we tell the company we want because the company has contracts that have to be honored. Until those contract run their course, DCI will be here. So the best thing for us to request (as was done in this TA) is not to increase DCI beyond what is currently on the property, in fact it will be reduced. DAL will get sued to no end by DCI if it attempts to break those agreements early and that would suck for us! Our management was smart enough to negotiate with DCI an agreeable downsizing of total RJ's which will create more Mainline flying for DAL pilots. Isn't that what we want, more DAL passengers being flown by more DAL pilots? As those DCI contracts expire during future PWAs, we can negotiate for them not to be renewed but as for now, that is NOT going to happen.
Having 255 as a max right now is just simply not possible. More 50 seaters is very possible under the current. We give them more 70+ seaters, we get more mainline flying, the customers are happier, they keep coming back and bringing more to pay our paychecks, we continue to upgauge because a 70+ seater can no longer carry the loads, we continue to negotiate fewer RJ's over subsequent contracts, we raise ticket prices, etc... See where this is going?
Why are the regionals so big and powerful? Because we had no cap on the amount of flying they could perform for us if this TA gets voted down.
Having 255 as a max right now is just simply not possible. More 50 seaters is very possible under the current. We give them more 70+ seaters, we get more mainline flying, the customers are happier, they keep coming back and bringing more to pay our paychecks, we continue to upgauge because a 70+ seater can no longer carry the loads, we continue to negotiate fewer RJ's over subsequent contracts, we raise ticket prices, etc... See where this is going?
Why are the regionals so big and powerful? Because we had no cap on the amount of flying they could perform for us if this TA gets voted down.
Giving up scope on 76 seaters gives away mainline flying. 2 class AC with 4 hour legs.This a no brainer. How is this giving US more mainline flying.It will take it away.
06-05-2012, 03:53 PM
#146
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 758
What do you make of:
The 717 deal is a part of the Company’s re-fleeting plan, which includes increasing mainline flying along with a substantial reduction of 50-seat aircraft and an overall cap of DCI aircraft at 450 down from the current 598. The TA provisions allow faster access to 76-seat aircraft than they would have otherwise. The provisions permit the Company
to negotiate with the DCI carriers and aircraft suppliers to replace 50-seat aircraft with 76-seat on approximately a 2-for-1 basis. Absent that ability, the Company will be obligated
to expend significant amounts to perform maintenance required to continue to fly the 50-seat aircraft. Without the reduction in small jet capacity, they have no need to add mainline capacity. All the provisions in Section 1 are front- loaded toward mainline pilot protections. Small narrow-body aircraft (717s) must be in the fleet before 76-seat aircraft are added, and the appropriate number of 50- seat aircraft must then be removed from the DCI fleet in the same year in which 76-seat aircraft are added. Regardless of what the Company does with the mainline fleet, the minimum block-hour ratio will require that, if domestic mainline block hours are reduced below a mini- mum level, DCI block hours will also have to be reduced to remain in compliance with the PWA.
The rest just sounds like you're pouting (I never asked for that...). Well, I'm sorry to inform you again the whole object ofNEGOTIATIONS mean you have to sometimes sacrifice things in order to get other things of greater importance. I do believe the understanding was that everyone who participated in the survey knew what Contract NEGOTIATIONS meant.
The 717 deal is a part of the Company’s re-fleeting plan, which includes increasing mainline flying along with a substantial reduction of 50-seat aircraft and an overall cap of DCI aircraft at 450 down from the current 598. The TA provisions allow faster access to 76-seat aircraft than they would have otherwise. The provisions permit the Company
to negotiate with the DCI carriers and aircraft suppliers to replace 50-seat aircraft with 76-seat on approximately a 2-for-1 basis. Absent that ability, the Company will be obligated
to expend significant amounts to perform maintenance required to continue to fly the 50-seat aircraft. Without the reduction in small jet capacity, they have no need to add mainline capacity. All the provisions in Section 1 are front- loaded toward mainline pilot protections. Small narrow-body aircraft (717s) must be in the fleet before 76-seat aircraft are added, and the appropriate number of 50- seat aircraft must then be removed from the DCI fleet in the same year in which 76-seat aircraft are added. Regardless of what the Company does with the mainline fleet, the minimum block-hour ratio will require that, if domestic mainline block hours are reduced below a mini- mum level, DCI block hours will also have to be reduced to remain in compliance with the PWA.
The rest just sounds like you're pouting (I never asked for that...). Well, I'm sorry to inform you again the whole object ofNEGOTIATIONS mean you have to sometimes sacrifice things in order to get other things of greater importance. I do believe the understanding was that everyone who participated in the survey knew what Contract NEGOTIATIONS meant.
Are you freaking kidding me?
Is this the respect you have for fellow pilots?
Wow....I am speechless.
I am glad to know that I am pouting about making concessions. Thanks for setting me straight.
06-05-2012, 03:58 PM
#147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 101
We had no limit on 50 seaters because we didn't need one.They will die away on their own as the are not cost effective.
Giving up scope on 76 seaters gives away mainline flying. 2 class AC with 4 hour legs.This a no brainer. How is this giving US more mainline flying.It will take it away.
Giving up scope on 76 seaters gives away mainline flying. 2 class AC with 4 hour legs.This a no brainer. How is this giving US more mainline flying.It will take it away.
06-05-2012, 04:00 PM
#148
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 101
I'm sorry if I offended you. I still don't see the concessions you are speaking of.
06-05-2012, 04:44 PM
#149
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 2,165
Leine,
I would use this as a baseline:
http://library.constantcontact.com/d...me-Booklet.pdf
This is the SWA Welcome Packet to Airtran pilots. The average Captain pay is $230,000; the average FO pay is $140,000, according to the packet. If my total compensation in this TA with pay and work rules reaches near $140K, then I'll vote yes.
ALPA does not have my trust because they have failed to include relevant facts in their presentations and because they do not show the down side to this TA.
Elvis
I would use this as a baseline:
http://library.constantcontact.com/d...me-Booklet.pdf
This is the SWA Welcome Packet to Airtran pilots. The average Captain pay is $230,000; the average FO pay is $140,000, according to the packet. If my total compensation in this TA with pay and work rules reaches near $140K, then I'll vote yes.
ALPA does not have my trust because they have failed to include relevant facts in their presentations and because they do not show the down side to this TA.
Elvis
At the risk of getting way off into hypothetical land, let's use some actual numbers from the TA. I will note my assumptions where applicable.
Delta 737-700/800 5-year FO rate on 1/1/2013 (1 day after our amendable date): $124.20
*I don't know what category you're in, but this seems a fair category to compare with a SWA FO. The numbers obviously get better or worse depending on longevity/category, but I digress....
Let's ASSUME an average of 80 hours/month which is definitely doable at straight pay for a lineholder, without stalking the swap board. ALPA says the "average" Delta pilot averages 87/month, so I'm undershooting by a whole lot here.
$124.20 x 80 hours = $9936/month
$9926 x 12 months = $119,232
Add in 14% DSPS/DC Contribution = $119,232 x 1.14 = $135,924.48
So, we have the day after our amendable date, a 5-year FO making about $4,000 less than your $140,000 figure. I'm not figuring in Distance Learning or any other pay/no credit item that will close the gap a little bit. SWAPA's number is subject to a bunch of assumptions as well, that I'm not privy to.
Is it close enough?
How about 1 year later on 1/1/2015 when pay goes up another 3% and DC bumps 1%? The Delta number (with another longevity step) = $144,778.56
I find the fascination with SWA pay interesting. Do we just want to be paid more than them for some competitive reason, or is being paid much better than we currently are okay too?
It seems to me that we're not that FAR off the mark. Consider the odds of dramatically exceeding the current offer in short order just because we "demand" it. I just don't see the unlikely payoff outweighing the risk. But that's just me
As always, I appreciate the civil discussion guys. We can disagree and still keep it clean!
06-05-2012, 05:11 PM
#150
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,050
Ok.
At the risk of getting way off into hypothetical land, let's use some actual numbers from the TA. I will note my assumptions where applicable.
Delta 737-700/800 5-year FO rate on 1/1/2013 (1 day after our amendable date): $124.20
*I don't know what category you're in, but this seems a fair category to compare with a SWA FO. The numbers obviously get better or worse depending on longevity/category, but I digress....
Let's ASSUME an average of 80 hours/month which is definitely doable at straight pay for a lineholder, without stalking the swap board. ALPA says the "average" Delta pilot averages 87/month, so I'm undershooting by a whole lot here.
$124.20 x 80 hours = $9936/month
$9926 x 12 months = $119,232
Add in 14% DSPS/DC Contribution = $119,232 x 1.14 = $135,924.48
So, we have the day after our amendable date, a 5-year FO making about $4,000 less than your $140,000 figure. I'm not figuring in Distance Learning or any other pay/no credit item that will close the gap a little bit. SWAPA's number is subject to a bunch of assumptions as well, that I'm not privy to.
Is it close enough?
How about 1 year later on 1/1/2015 when pay goes up another 3% and DC bumps 1%? The Delta number (with another longevity step) = $144,778.56
I find the fascination with SWA pay interesting. Do we just want to be paid more than them for some competitive reason, or is being paid much better than we currently are okay too?
It seems to me that we're not that FAR off the mark. Consider the odds of dramatically exceeding the current offer in short order just because we "demand" it. I just don't see the unlikely payoff outweighing the risk. But that's just me
As always, I appreciate the civil discussion guys. We can disagree and still keep it clean!
At the risk of getting way off into hypothetical land, let's use some actual numbers from the TA. I will note my assumptions where applicable.
Delta 737-700/800 5-year FO rate on 1/1/2013 (1 day after our amendable date): $124.20
*I don't know what category you're in, but this seems a fair category to compare with a SWA FO. The numbers obviously get better or worse depending on longevity/category, but I digress....
Let's ASSUME an average of 80 hours/month which is definitely doable at straight pay for a lineholder, without stalking the swap board. ALPA says the "average" Delta pilot averages 87/month, so I'm undershooting by a whole lot here.
$124.20 x 80 hours = $9936/month
$9926 x 12 months = $119,232
Add in 14% DSPS/DC Contribution = $119,232 x 1.14 = $135,924.48
So, we have the day after our amendable date, a 5-year FO making about $4,000 less than your $140,000 figure. I'm not figuring in Distance Learning or any other pay/no credit item that will close the gap a little bit. SWAPA's number is subject to a bunch of assumptions as well, that I'm not privy to.
Is it close enough?
How about 1 year later on 1/1/2015 when pay goes up another 3% and DC bumps 1%? The Delta number (with another longevity step) = $144,778.56
I find the fascination with SWA pay interesting. Do we just want to be paid more than them for some competitive reason, or is being paid much better than we currently are okay too?
It seems to me that we're not that FAR off the mark. Consider the odds of dramatically exceeding the current offer in short order just because we "demand" it. I just don't see the unlikely payoff outweighing the risk. But that's just me
As always, I appreciate the civil discussion guys. We can disagree and still keep it clean!
Not many line holding 5 year guys on the 737 - anywhere. I'll be on 6th year pay next spring and I'm going to be the plug in CVG, can't hold ATL, SLC, or LAX. Only other base I could hold would be NYC as a reserve. I doubt I'll be averaging 80 a month (I have kept a personal record of monthly pay since I was hired and I have averaged 73.91 hours per month. That number includes CQ pay, etc...). The increased reserve pay will help, but I'd wager I'll be in the 75-77 hour average for the year.
I would say that the typical SWA schedule mirrors the MD88/90 trips more than they do our 737 trips. As we all know, the MD88/90 pays MUCH less than the 737. SWA pilots do quite a bit of up and down and work harder (more efficiently) than most of our 737 trips (SWAG based on a quick perusing of bid packages).
My desire for all of our pilots to match or exceed SWA compensation stems from the facts that we: do more diverse flying, have helped the company achieve great efficiencies from the merger in short order and the fact that we have been making and are forecast to produce record profits. I feel that professionalism and cooperation should be recognized in the form of compensation equal to or greater than a company that operates in our own backyard, doing less diverse flying and making less corporate profit than us.
Just my opinion.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
